• Register
PhysicsOverflow is a next-generation academic platform for physicists and astronomers, including a community peer review system and a postgraduate-level discussion forum analogous to MathOverflow.

Welcome to PhysicsOverflow! PhysicsOverflow is an open platform for community peer review and graduate-level Physics discussion.

Please help promote PhysicsOverflow ads elsewhere if you like it.


PO is now at the Physics Department of Bielefeld University!

New printer friendly PO pages!

Migration to Bielefeld University was successful!

Please vote for this year's PhysicsOverflow ads!

Please do help out in categorising submissions. Submit a paper to PhysicsOverflow!

... see more

Tools for paper authors

Submit paper
Claim Paper Authorship

Tools for SE users

Search User
Reclaim SE Account
Request Account Merger
Nativise imported posts
Claim post (deleted users)
Import SE post

Users whose questions have been imported from Physics Stack Exchange, Theoretical Physics Stack Exchange, or any other Stack Exchange site are kindly requested to reclaim their account and not to register as a new user.

Public \(\beta\) tools

Report a bug with a feature
Request a new functionality
404 page design
Send feedback


(propose a free ad)

Site Statistics

205 submissions , 163 unreviewed
5,054 questions , 2,207 unanswered
5,345 answers , 22,721 comments
1,470 users with positive rep
818 active unimported users
More ...

  What should be imported from the theoretical physics FAQ?

+ 4 like - 0 dislike

I intent to slowly import pieces from my theoretical physics FAQ in the form of questions and answers by myself, thereby updating the FAQ (which is currently plain html or plain text, so it must be enriched by latex) and making it open for discussion.

Since the FAQ currently consists of nearly 250 entries and I want to import only one or two entries a week, there is a lot of room for choice. I started with Action-based quantum field theory and causal perturbation theory since this was related to one of the questions under discussion not long ago. 

It would help me to set priorities in the choice of the next entries to post if you'd state your wishes and preferences (either by topic, or by title of a FAQ entry). 

asked Jul 29, 2014 in Discussion by Arnold Neumaier (15,787 points) [ no revision ]

3 Answers

+ 2 like - 0 dislike

I would be interested in an extended post about  the topic

Projective geometry and quantum mechanics

answered Jul 30, 2014 by Dilaton (6,240 points) [ no revision ]

This is just about how states are only defined up to a multiplicative constant, the name "projective geometry" is just added to give context.

+ 0 like - 0 dislike

I think that the chapters B8, B5, B4, B3, and B7 may be very good to have first on PhysicsOverflow. Specifically, B5 and some of B7 may be a bit useful to overshadow the "anti-QFT" stuff going on in some threads.

In fact, if everyone is fine with it, it may be a good idea to tag all the posts from your FAQ with "tp-faq-1" or something. The "1" is supposed to encourage other users to also post such "serial posts".

answered Jul 30, 2014 by dimension10 (1,985 points) [ no revision ]
+ 0 like - 2 dislike

I don't see the point of importing most of the stuff, as 90% of it is inflammatory philosophical positions concerning every controversial thing in physics, and to put it bluntly, many people don't agree with the positions. I suppose if it's here, it can be discussed, but a lot of the discussions are hackneyed.

I am in favor of importing the discussion of the Lindblatt equation for dissipative systems, but this requires a discussion of how to actually compute the dissipative coefficients. For a Feynman-Vernon (Caldera Legett) bath, you get interactions in the bath-removed description which are not local at all, unless you make some truncation. This is not discussed in the FAQ anyway, which just mentions the equation.

Sorry for being a dick, but I don't like the FAQ, as I don't agree with the philosophy most of the time, and even when I do, it doesn't strike me as non-controversial stuff, as a FAQ should be. I suppose one could write alternative answers, but it's demoralizing, because this stuff is very old issues, which are discussed ad nauseum in the literature, and everyone has already made up their mind about what language they like best.

answered Jul 29, 2014 by Ron Maimon (7,720 points) [ revision history ]

As I understand it, these posts would not serve as any kind of  "official FAQ" here, but as "ordinary questions" with a self-answer. They can be disagreed with, and discussed/questioned  as needed ...

Ok, some of them are probably rather philosophical (my favorite QM interpretation is the shut up and calculate ;-),,, ), but there are also ones that look quite interesting to me.

Yes, I think posts can be discussed when imported. I am interested in bare/physical particles and their interactions.

The FAQ questions I saw were very elementary, except for the ones relating to the Lindblatt equations. In the case that they touch on graduate topics, the answers given were philosophically grating, because they emphasized one particular point of view, and clobbered other points of view.

Your answer

Please use answers only to (at least partly) answer questions. To comment, discuss, or ask for clarification, leave a comment instead.
To mask links under text, please type your text, highlight it, and click the "link" button. You can then enter your link URL.
Please consult the FAQ for as to how to format your post.
This is the answer box; if you want to write a comment instead, please use the 'add comment' button.
Live preview (may slow down editor)   Preview
Your name to display (optional):
Privacy: Your email address will only be used for sending these notifications.
Anti-spam verification:
If you are a human please identify the position of the character covered by the symbol $\varnothing$ in the following word:
Then drag the red bullet below over the corresponding character of our banner. When you drop it there, the bullet changes to green (on slow internet connections after a few seconds).
Please complete the anti-spam verification

user contributions licensed under cc by-sa 3.0 with attribution required

Your rights